1977 CB550 Caferacer build
- Thread starter Canadian
- Start date
Bigsherm said:
Bigsherm, I'd like to pull that apart if you don't mind.
You say the steering geometry is the same as a CBR1000 - now I'm not sure which year or model, but changing the fork angle (rake) on its own does not make it handle well - or better - or like a CBR1000 - old or new. The issue that seems to be missed here is that on a modern bike, yes the steering rake is steeper, but to compensate for the way that reduces trail, they engineer less offset into the triple clamps.
That's because trail is way more important than rake angle. The next thing they do is to stiffen the frame in a couple of ways so that it can handle the additional bending force that a steeper rake creates and they tie it to the swingarm pivot in a stiffer way. With the steeper forks, the next thing they do is to move the center of mass forward to better load the front tire under trail braking and entering a turn.
And so on.... Now if you did all those things intentionally having worked through the numbers, I take my hat off to you.
As for getting your knee down, so what does that tell us about your bike's handling? Not a thing, unfortunately. I can get my knee down on a CB72 race bike that has all the stiffness of an al dente noodle. It doesn't men it handles well. And that's the issue that XB is raising. Anecdotes are often misleading and don't help the OP to understand what works and what doesn't and where the risk lies.
I believe you are trying to be helpful, but what your ability to get a knee down isn't an accurate prediction of what will probably happen to the OP under less favorable conditions.
BigSherm
Been Around the Block
teazer-
Yes, getting a knee down doesn't prove anything. I'm only saying my bike rode great, and that's one example of how it did.
I also didn't say the OP's bike would handle any way at all. I'm only saying just because a bike is lowered in the front and raised in the rear doesn't mean it will handle badly, and my bike was proof.
Neither did I say my bike's steering geometry was the same as the CBR. I said the fork angle was. Since you brought it up, though, my rake and trail geometry were identical to the CBR because of the combination of shock length, the CBR clamps, position of the forks, and wheel and tire sizes I used.
None of those was my point, though.
Without even asking the rider, telling him his bike handles poorly afer looking at those pictures is senseless, was my point.
Credit to BSA in understanding what I said.
-Sherm
Yes, getting a knee down doesn't prove anything. I'm only saying my bike rode great, and that's one example of how it did.
I also didn't say the OP's bike would handle any way at all. I'm only saying just because a bike is lowered in the front and raised in the rear doesn't mean it will handle badly, and my bike was proof.
Neither did I say my bike's steering geometry was the same as the CBR. I said the fork angle was. Since you brought it up, though, my rake and trail geometry were identical to the CBR because of the combination of shock length, the CBR clamps, position of the forks, and wheel and tire sizes I used.
None of those was my point, though.
Without even asking the rider, telling him his bike handles poorly afer looking at those pictures is senseless, was my point.
Credit to BSA in understanding what I said.
-Sherm
